Free will, freedom from what?

[henry quirk]

I was making a point about gravity, not free will.

Me too.

[promethean75]

"But there is absolutely nothing contradicting about that"

This is true, yes. That's not the word i was lookin for. What i was tryna mean was that the determinist can't become perturbed at the freewillist while at the same time admitting that it's determined that he not believe in determinism, if that's how it ends up. Sumthin like that maybe.

[Immanuel Can]

Aircraft function according to the laws of aerodynamics in conjunction with the law of gravity. There's no way round it, henry, you can't wish physical laws away.

But what have physical laws got to do with free will?

I have no idea. I was making a point about gravity, not free will.

Oh. You missed the earlier conversation, then. For some reason I can't figure out, Janoah thinks that the existence of gravity proves that free will doesn't exist. At the same time, he claims that Determinism is "absurd."

I've been trying to make sense out of all that, but I really don't think I can.

[Atla]

"But there is absolutely nothing contradicting about that"

This is true, yes. That's not the word i was lookin for. What i was tryna mean was that the determinist can't become perturbed at the freewillist while at the same time admitting that it's determined that he not believe in determinism, if that's how it ends up. Sumthin like that maybe.

Yes whatever happens, happens. If someone believes in free will, then that's what was predetermined to happen. Whether or not the determinist then changes that person's mind, either outcome would be predetermined too. Everyday psychological human volition changes nothing, it's also seen as deterministic. If someone deliberately lives like he/she had as much free will as possible, which is the best mindset, then this was predetermined too.

(Unless some 5-dimensional quantum free-will ahaha)

[attofishpi]

"But there is absolutely nothing contradicting about that"

This is true, yes. That's not the word i was lookin for. What i was tryna mean was that the determinist can't become perturbed at the freewillist while at the same time admitting that it's determined that he not believe in determinism, if that's how it ends up. Sumthin like that maybe.

Yes whatever happens, happens. If someone believes in free will, then that's what was predetermined to happen. Whether or not the determinist then changes that person's mind, either outcome would be predetermined too. Everyday psychological human volition changes nothing, it's also seen as deterministic. If someone deliberately lives like he/she had as much free will as possible, which is the best mindset, then this was predetermined too.

Yes, apparently since the Big Bang to now this ridiculously placed tilde--> ~ was always going to happen.

(Unless some 5-dimensional quantum free-will ahaha)

Well, quantum-indeterminacy where consciousness is concerned is part of my angle, that we of conscious minds do have free-will and this tilde--> ..was never going to happen. (not since the Big Bang determined universe, but because I decided not to put one there)

[Self-Lightening]

But let me ask you this, instead: if we, to whom you are arguing, have no free will, no volition, then how do you expect us to change our minds? According to your theory, the only reason we think what we think, at any given time, is because "natural law" made us think what we think. So we have no ability to choose our beliefs, and the quality of your arguments has no impact on whether we believe X or Y. Only "natural laws" determine that, not quality of argument.

False dualism: arguments and the effect they have on the brain are always in complete conformity with "natural laws" (the laws of physics).

[Flannel Jesus]

FJ is right: all it does is change the "mechanism" that is supposed to produce the predetermined outcome. It doesn't make the outcome less predetermined. Instead of it being by predictable natural forces, it merely becomes by unpredictable forces or randomness. But it doesn't open up an explanation for human volition or freedom.

You might be confusing relativity with quantum mechanics. Relativity has nothing to do with randomness.

No, I meant to treat them as different issues, not as one.

How? You used the word "it" throughout your post, and the only candidate for what "it" could mean at every point in that post is "relativity". I suppose about half way through "it" starts meaning "volition", but there's no introduction of quantum mechanics at all, you just randomly start talking about randomness in a conversation about relativity.

[Flannel Jesus]

As long as you understand that einstein,

In general, a physicist does not mean a philosopher.
There are neglected cases when physicists believe that one Jew, whom they call God, walked on water with a group of other Jews, and this does not prevent physicists from receiving Nobel Prizes in Physics.

Ah, another dunning Krueger, the true mark of a philosopher.

[Self-Lightening]

"But there is absolutely nothing contradicting about that"

This is true, yes. That's not the word i was lookin for. What i was tryna mean was that the determinist can't become perturbed at the freewillist while at the same time admitting that it's determined that he not believe in determinism, if that's how it ends up. Sumthin like that maybe.

Yes whatever happens, happens. If someone believes in free will, then that's what was predetermined to happen. Whether or not the determinist then changes that person's mind, either outcome would be predetermined too. Everyday psychological human volition changes nothing, it's also seen as deterministic. If someone deliberately lives like he/she had as much free will as possible, which is the best mindset, then this was predetermined too.

Yes, apparently since the Big Bang to now this ridiculously placed tilde--> ~ was always going to happen.

Not necessarily; only if Superdeterminism is true.

YouTube/Sabine Hossenfelder, "Does Superdeterminism save Quantum Mechanics? Or does it kill free will and destroy science?"

(Unless some 5-dimensional quantum free-will ahaha)

Well, quantum-indeterminacy where consciousness is concerned is part of my angle, that we of conscious minds do have free-will and this tilde--> ..was never going to happen. (not since the Big Bang determined universe, but because I decided not to put one there)

You decided it, but your decision was at "best" determined by a quantum indeterminacy over which you had no power whatsoever.

[Immanuel Can]

But let me ask you this, instead: if we, to whom you are arguing, have no free will, no volition, then how do you expect us to change our minds? According to your theory, the only reason we think what we think, at any given time, is because "natural law" made us think what we think. So we have no ability to choose our beliefs, and the quality of your arguments has no impact on whether we believe X or Y. Only "natural laws" determine that, not quality of argument.

False dualism: arguments and the effect they have on the brain are always in complete conformity with "natural laws" (the laws of physics).

No, an "argument," by definition, is not a physical thing, but rather a conceptual abstraction. Can you measure an "argument"? Can you put it in a beaker? Can you pinch it in Vernier calipers, or dissect it? It's not part of the physical world, but belongs to mental phenomena. And we have no "natural laws" that predictably describe its operation. Unless somebody "believes" it, and acts on it into the physical world, it's inert.

[Immanuel Can]

...you just randomly start talking about randomness in a conversation about relativity.

They're both explanations people think might account for volition, but neither does. Relativity doesn't produce freedom, anymore than quantum fluctuations do. And nobody can explain how either one would do so, so far as I've been able to discover.

[Atla]

"But there is absolutely nothing contradicting about that"

This is true, yes. That's not the word i was lookin for. What i was tryna mean was that the determinist can't become perturbed at the freewillist while at the same time admitting that it's determined that he not believe in determinism, if that's how it ends up. Sumthin like that maybe.

Yes whatever happens, happens. If someone believes in free will, then that's what was predetermined to happen. Whether or not the determinist then changes that person's mind, either outcome would be predetermined too. Everyday psychological human volition changes nothing, it's also seen as deterministic. If someone deliberately lives like he/she had as much free will as possible, which is the best mindset, then this was predetermined too.

Yes, apparently since the Big Bang to now this ridiculously placed tilde--> ~ was always going to happen.

(Unless some 5-dimensional quantum free-will ahaha)

Well, quantum-indeterminacy where consciousness is concerned is part of my angle, that we of conscious minds do have free-will and this tilde--> ..was never going to happen. (not since the Big Bang determined universe, but because I decided not to put one there)

You know nothing about the topic so it can't really be part of your angle.

[Flannel Jesus]

...you just randomly start talking about randomness in a conversation about relativity.

They're both explanations people think might account for volition, but neither does.

Who talks about relativity like this? Who are these "people"?

[attofishpi]

Yes whatever happens, happens. If someone believes in free will, then that's what was predetermined to happen. Whether or not the determinist then changes that person's mind, either outcome would be predetermined too. Everyday psychological human volition changes nothing, it's also seen as deterministic. If someone deliberately lives like he/she had as much free will as possible, which is the best mindset, then this was predetermined too.

Yes, apparently since the Big Bang to now this ridiculously placed tilde--> ~ was always going to happen.

(Unless some 5-dimensional quantum free-will ahaha)

Well, quantum-indeterminacy where consciousness is concerned is part of my angle, that we of conscious minds do have free-will and this tilde--> ..was never going to happen. (not since the Big Bang determined universe, but because I decided not to put one there)

You know nothing about the topic so it can't really be part of your angle.

Well, that's odd.

I had no idea you know me better than I know me. From whence are you drawing the conclusion that I know nothing about the topic?

[attofishpi]

Yes whatever happens, happens. If someone believes in free will, then that's what was predetermined to happen. Whether or not the determinist then changes that person's mind, either outcome would be predetermined too. Everyday psychological human volition changes nothing, it's also seen as deterministic. If someone deliberately lives like he/she had as much free will as possible, which is the best mindset, then this was predetermined too.

Yes, apparently since the Big Bang to now this ridiculously placed tilde--> ~ was always going to happen.

Not necessarily; only if Superdeterminism is true.

YouTube/Sabine Hossenfelder, "Does Superdeterminism save Quantum Mechanics? Or does it kill free will and destroy science?"

(Unless some 5-dimensional quantum free-will ahaha)

Well, quantum-indeterminacy where consciousness is concerned is part of my angle, that we of conscious minds do have free-will and this tilde--> ..was never going to happen. (not since the Big Bang determined universe, but because I decided not to put one there)

You decided it, but your decision was at "best" determined by a quantum indeterminacy over which you had no power whatsoever.

Are you familiar with the following thought experiment?


BOONY'S ROOM: A thought experiment to consider Determinism and Free Will/Compatibilism..

Two identical copies of cricketer David Boon were made unbeknownst to him, in an instant!

The two copies of "Boony", instantly appear facing each other from opposite corners of a white room that is 3 metres cubed, identical in all directions.

There are no causal effects differing in each of the Boony's slightly differing positions in spacetime. Nothing in this thought experiment regarding each version of David Boon once instantiated within the room is different in any way.


What happens next?


Do they both, at the same time, ask the exact same question of each other? Do they end up arguing because they both keep attempting to interject at precisely the same time with precisely the same dialogue?

After five minutes, the pair hear a voice asking them to draw a picture of their favourite fruit on the wall and are told there is a pencil in their left pocket.

Do they both turn and draw on the same symmetrically opposite part of the wall? Do they both draw identical images of the fruit?